Skip to main content

About your Search

English 29
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)
election cycle, he was one of the strongest voices this he had would a lost our way -- that we'd lost our way in washington. jim is a kind, sincere man, an individual who is a joy to be around. when it comes to what's going on in america, jim understands that if we don't make some changes we're going to lose our way of life. that's what's driven him above all else, to try to keep our country a place to be place where you can be anything. i look forward to working with jim in the private sector. from a personal point of view, we've had a great ride together. it has been fun. it has been challenging, and i think we put south carolina on the map in different ways at different times, and to people back in south carolina, i hope if you get to see jim anytime soon, just say "thank you." because whether you agree with him or not, he was doing what he thought was best for south carolina and the united states. at the end of the day, that's as good as it gets. because if you're doing what you really believe in and you're not worried about being the most popular and people getting mad ought, then yo
as far as that road that is concerned whether it is the road map to elections as the ambassador was speaking to or a road map for the negotiations between the various disaffected elements in the north of bahrain to renounce violence and engage in an negotiations process. obviously if we get to a point of elections being held and being able to resume assistance with the forces, that will be an important step forward for the united states to be able to directly help the malian forces in addition to other contributing countries. european union, france, others have already begun to really engage with the malian forces, so it isn't as if there is an abstinence of support for them in the intervening period. >> what lessons have we learned, if i might, ms. dory and mr. gast, i think the mission just celebrated the 50th anniversary. we were actively engaged in the training a good thing as a part of the very probably democracy support and in trying to create and sustain a cultural democracy what lessons are there that we might learn going forward about political failures and more on dome
there after the election. he says if there's something worse going on, he can't see it. >> i think there's a marked difference between this negotiation and what took place two summers, i guess, ago between speaker boehner and the president when frankly i thought the white house did a poor job of its advocacy for its own position. this is different. it's as if they learned i lesson. they're digging in deeply this time around. they have the wind at their back because of an election result. it's a strategy. as you mentioned he's campai campaigning today. it's like the campaign didn't end. >> chris, let me bring you in. a lot of people talk about this latest interview with secretary geithner. let me play a little bit of what he had to say regarding the fiscal cliff and the threat that looms. let me play it. >> when it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy, those making more than $250,000, if republicans do not agree to that, is the administration prepared to go over the fiscal cliff? >> absolutely. there's no prospect to an agreement that doesn't involve those rates going up on the top 2% of
back and that's the solid election victory, where he reason quite explicitly on raising the tax rates on the top 2%. so he know the american people support it. the majority of romney voters on exit polls supported that position. so this is not just dealing with boehner. it's dealing with the american people. and the most important thing is to get a long-term component of the plan and the election results favor him, number 1. number 2 january 1st comes we put a bill on the floor, we quote lower taxes because we couldn't provide tax relief at that point for 98% of americans, and there's no way they would vote against that. >> stephanie: this raising the debt ceiling debacle he said is not a game i'm going to play again. >> we blew it last time. and if you remember the republicans for the first time in the history of the country, literally started playing russian roulette with america's credit, and it was such brinksmanship that we ended up having the markets panic and had the fist downgrade in the history of our country. and that cost billions of dollars to taxpa
is simply a process. you had an election. he took a bow for their own enslavement and often do. people forget this. they think world for freedom. i'm sorry, but there's a constituency that is per submission. this is a site goes fact of life that is not fully appreciated. in the west. so how do you go about it? to distinguish between democracy and liberalism and you try as best you can to promote the spirit of liberalism, even if it is procedurally at the expense of the brotherhood. >> your response to that? >> i'm listening to this discussion which i enjoy thoroughly, but my mind as to how we do this. and i would throw home one point that i'm trying to stress here that i may agree or disagree with some of the things said. the problem in washington is you look at the democracy, freedom and liberal promotion mechanisms we have. they're actually not as nimble as they need to be. i look at benghazi and answers questions about the talking points, but the bigger policy deployed when he set up is how do we influence the next faith? ambassador chris stevens who is killed to honor his memory. r
just lost re-election and the eight or so seats. on the other hand, he still has a very diverse caucus in terms of ideology and it's going to be very difficult. you'll notice in hiss comments he didn't say no to 37%. that said, if he agreed to 37% and he's basically bilateral talks with the president, who says the kwaux is going to approve that. he could end up with a lot of egg on his face if he agrees with the president on this, they go forward with the vote, and it doesn't pass. >> david, the office of management and budget, omb, asking government agencies to figure out what they would cut if we do go over this fiscal cliff. talking a trillion dollars in cuts over ten years. that would mean furloughs for some federal workers, slower hiring, outside contracting, the closer we get to the cliff, the more real it begins to seem. how does that then change the negotiations? >> well, i think it's all part of the political pressure the white house is trying to apply to the congressional republicans. we saw the same thing in '11 when we had the near government shutdown and the dispute over t
with the republicans. >> that's it. >> and that's -- that is the lesson of his election. >> instead of backwards the way he did his first two years. >> exactly right. >> axelrod is coming on tomorrow and we've taken that mustache off. if it's way too early it's "morning joe." stick around right now though for chuck todd "the daily rundown." >>> take it to the bank. timothy geithner says the white house is ready to go over the cliff. republicans might stucmble, though, into having some leverage if they end up backing the tax rate plan now and kick the rest of the can to february. one top republican governor has some stinging sarcasm for his own party's position. in the middle east the situation in syria turns from serious to scary. concerns over chemical weapons has secretary clinton conferring with her russian counterpart today to try to avoid deadly developments. >>> an nbc news exclusive, afghanistan's president hamid karzai talks about his country's future and ongoing insecurity and blames the taliban of course. guess who else? nato and the united states. good morning from washington. it's th
on the egyptian elections. >> good morning everyone. thank you, bob, for that introduction and thank you all of you for coming out early this morning for what i think will be a lively debate. we are going to be asking the question if democracy is to triumph in the middle east, victories at the ballot box are inavoidable and essential. this is the motion we will be debating in the intelligence-squared format per requests from our panelists who have done this once already -- they have had a practice round. they have not had a chance of doing this, but i suspect, had probably had several scotches and talked about ways to defeat their foes. we know that this is a time of revolution in the middle east. it started with a fruit sell seller in tunisia and toppled a 230-year dictator that spread to egypt and the egyptian revolution was concern to the united states. egypt has long held incredible importance to u.s. policy in the middle east. the u.s. reaction to that revolution was unclear. there were some that said this was a good thing that this would only lead to democracy. there were others who in
you know what your elected officials are doing. passing a bill to ban the word lunatic. >> gretchen: people will not be able to watch and call us that. should we give billions of hard earned american dollars to egypt even though we can't pay our own bills? congressman bucan an said it is amoral. >> the pent depon is preparing for massive cuts. pentagon today is scaling back and became the triangle. ♪ ♪ are you ready for this? ♪ snot ♪ nouncer ] the rhythm of life. [ whistle blowing ] where do you hear that beat? campbell's healthy request soup lets you hear it... in your heart. [ basketball bouncing ] heart healthy. great taste. mmm... [ male announcer ] sounds good. it's amazing what soup can do. and with my bankamericard cash rewards credit card, i love 'em even more. i earn 1% cash back everywhere, evertime. 2% on groceries. 3% on gas. automatically. no hoops to jump through. that's 1% back on... [ toy robot sounds ] 2% on pumpn pie. and apple. 3% back on 4 trips to the airport. it's as easy as.. -[ man ] 1... -[ woman ] 2... [ woman ] 3. [ male announcer ] the bankameric
duly elected leadership are built on more stable foundation this can be substantial but brutal ties the u.s. maintains with the hosni mubarak regime in egypt or yemen. nowhere in the region is the struggle against dictatorship more vital than in syria. over the past 20 months it has become abundantly clear that with assad in power there is no possibility, none whatever, for democratic process in syria. for years syria has been one of the most repressive countries in the world according to the state department rights reports, analytical studies by freedom house. political dissidents were routinely in prisons or disappeared and journalists were silenced. human-rights activists operated underground living in constant fear of the dreaded -- mr reuel marc gerecht 23 -- assad was cast by many as a, quote, reformer but his terrible treatment of his own people should have been a strong indication of what he was really all about. callie government treats its people the true testament to its character. callie government treats its own people in vindication of how it will act on the world stag
the synopsis there. >> reporter: the president's position, all along, has been he was elected to establish the democratic institutions after the 2011 revolution. he said he inherited the legislature and announced decrees to push through with the process of forming a constitution of establishing a parliament. and avoiding what he called the impediment of the old judges and the remnants from the mubarak regime who wanted to block his way. then you have opposition factions who described that process as a power grab, as the president's attempt, as the muslim brotherhood's attempt to month onnize power. they are very concerned, down the road an islamist-led government could use the constitution to deny them the right. they don't want to vote on this draft constitution. that's why they're out here protesting at this hour. >> reza, as always, appreciate your reporting from sicairo. >>> strong warning for syria's president not to use chemical weapons against his own people. nato secretary-general said the use of such weapons would result in an immediate reaction, his words. he described the syrian
interview since the election, president obama rejected a proposal from house speaker john boehner. he spoke on bloomberg television. >> unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. i'm happy to entertain other ideas that the republicans may present. but we are not going to simply cut our way to prosperity or to cut our way out of this deficit problem that we have. we're going to need more revenues. in order to do that, that starts with higher rates for the folks at the top. >> reporter: the president did say today he would consider lowering rates again for the top two percent next year as part of a broader tax overhaul. the house republican plan envisions $2.2 trillion in deficit reductions over the next decade. $800 billion would come from new revenues but with no hike in tax rates for top earners. instead the plan relies on $1.2 trillion in reduced spending including $600 billion from changes in medicare and medicaid. at the white house today, the president met with a bipartisan group of governors pressing his own plan for deficit reduction. that proposal, $1.6
is actually in a stronger position in his caucus than when he was elected two years ago. how is he doing, do you think? >> well, i think he's in a stronger position because republicans feel like they're in a weaker position. i think a lot of republicans who might prefer a different leader don't feel they have the luxury of that right now. in fact, even congressman kantor and others, who boehner didn't think he could count on the last time around, are being supportive. republicans are trying to calculate how much they have to give in now and is there a way to fall back with the idea of being able to move ahead in a more aggressive way next year. that's why you saw the president in a very preemptive way trying to rule out the idea of tying talks to next february to raising the debt ceiling. >> alan simpson, the co-chair of the president's deficit commission, was on the "today" show this morning and he said all this talk about either side being able to go off the cliff is ridiculous. let me play that for you. >> when you have leaders of parties and people from the administration saying i think
leaders weren't leading and they aren't listening. the elections accident a clear message. they said meet the new boss instesame as the old boss. same president, same senate, same house. we truly made have will sunk the titanic. we may have put too much hope in human beings could have solved problems in many cases not nearly as booed good at it. you at least balance your checkbook at home and you pay your bills and you show up for work. washington hasn't balanced it's checkbook. it has to borrow money from the chinese to pay its bills. barely shows any real work or progress on our behalf. maybe they just aren't listening to us any more. it occurred to me if they won't listen to us i wonder if they will listen to a stronger voice. i wonder if they will listen to god? walls of water party, or signs and watonders. sometimes you speak them in a still small voice. since the leaders from either party don't seem to listen to us wonder what would happen if we asked god to speak to them so maybe they would listen to him. it may be a good day for somebody to have more of a million voice march on ca
by the fiscal future. he could be concerned about every citizen in the state that he was elected to serve. his job -- those are his constituents and that's his job. >> look, i see where you come from. we have to think about this in a broader sense. if every state is looking out for itself, there's going to free ride. they're going to engage in policies that damage everyone's well-being over the long term by looking out for their own re-election prospects. these guys are being political rather than looking out for the long-term interests of their citizens, their states and also the country as a whole. rather than sub sid dies development in really dangerous areas. that's called moral hazard, and that's something that's really bringing the country to its knees economically. >> last i checked, you look out for yourself. you might say that's not a great idea, if you're in new york -- actually, no, if you're in new york you're concerned about new york and not about california. you focus on where you are. that's a reality. >> all right. thanks very much to both of us. please let us know what you thi
was elected to serve. his job, those are his constituents. that's his job. >> well, look. i see where you're coming from but we have to think about this in a broader sense. okay? if every state is looking out only for itself, what they're going to do is free ride. they're going to engage in policies that damage everyone's wellbeing over the long term looking out for their own re-election prospects. >> wait, wait. >> they're really political rather than looking out for the long-term interests of the citizens, their states and also the country as a whole. >> last i checked -- >> beforehand rather than subsidize development and dangerous areas and that's moral hazard and that's something that's bringing the country to the knees economically. >> last i checked you look out for yourself. >> that's public servants are supposed to do, roland. >> no. in new york, you are concerned about new york and not california. you focus on where you are. that's the reality. >> all right. we are going to hit pause there. please let us know what you think about that conversation on twitter and facebook page. >
these negotiations. if he really was going to have an about face after the election and really concerned about the legacy, i actually disagree to a certain extent because i think that he thinks the first four years was his legacy. >> yeah. i think you're right to some extent. this is obviously we're speculating here. the president could, this might happen, might be a last minute razzle dazzle here, where he rushes in and they've already kind of agreed to a deal and he didn't get everything he wants, but he gets most of what he wants. he might envision something like that. i'm telling you, when i heard folks like lindsey graham over the weekend say, i don't think there is going to be a deal, that kind of stuck with me and maybe there won't be a deal. i'm not sure that's such a bad thing given what the alternatives are. >> steve: i'm sure you've heard or seen that apparently the republicans doomsday plan, if the talks collapse, allowed the vote on extending the middle tax class tax cuts, the senate passed that back in august, and the republicans would all vote present, then allow the democrats t
's an election year and people say things in that process. and now that we have a movie that is actually going to be in theaters soon, i think people will see we didn't come with any agenda at all. >> i think one of the things they're going to be surprised at one of the center characters, perhaps the person most responsible for finding where he was hiding was a woman, the character you play, mya. what did you think of her? >> well, when i first read the script, i was shocked that a woman played a central role in it and then i was upset at myself that i was so shocked. why wouldn't a woman play a central role to it? it helps when your script writers and investigative journalists. three months before we start shooting to basically go to school. >> did you get to meet her? >> no, she's an undercover cia agent. >> was there pressure bringing her to the screen knowing she may be watching your portrayal of her. >> or sitting next to me on a bus. >> she could be running the camera in here. we don't know. >> yes, there's a lot of pressure. because whenever you play a real life person, especially a wom
Search Results 0 to 28 of about 29 (some duplicates have been removed)